‘Right wing extremists’ more dangerous than radical Islam, according to NY Times

Pay no attention to those beheading plots, attacks on “Draw Muhammad” contests and the occasional bombing at the Boston Marathon.

The main terrorist threat in the United States is not from radical Islam, but from “right wing extremists,” two professors claimed in an opinion piece published Tuesday in The New York Times.

Despite a slew of recent high-profile cases — such as the Garland, Texas, attack where two Muslim terrorists bent on mass murder were stopped only by the accurate shooting of an alert police officer — Charles Kurzman and David Schanzer wrote in the Times that “headlines can be misleading.”

Claiming the real threat to peace in America comes from domestic politics, the two University professors say radicalization from the Middle East is a concern, but “not as dangerous as radicalization among right wing” groups in America.

The pair drew their conclusions from a survey of 382 law enforcement agencies and from follow-up interviews with 19 agents from across the nation, citing one police officer who said “we just haven’t experienced” any terrorism from American Muslims.

Which is true… if you don’t consider the previously mentioned attacks in Garland, the shooting at Fort Hood, the Boston Marathon bombing, or any of the foiled Islamic terrorist plots since 9/11.

US veteran fights to live ‘off the grid’; threatened for not using city utilities

Kurzman and Schanzer also cited a Department of Justice memo that warned law enforcement about the danger of citizens who “fear that government will confiscate firearms” or believe “in the approaching collapse of government and the economy.”

The Times’ piece listed a string of little-known attacks by “right wing extremists,” including an attack on police in Nevada by a disturbed couple who had affiliations with the “Occupy Wall Street” movement.

The two academics tried to justify their assertions by portraying all acts of “anti-government violence” as being linked with right wing political ideology.

“An officer on the West Coast explained that the ‘sovereign citizen’ anti­government threat has ‘really taken off,’” they wrote.

The Times’ piece ends with a plea to begin scrutinizing political groups, while relaxing the focus on potentially radical Islamic communities.

“Public debates on terrorism focus intensely on Muslims. But this focus does not square with the low number of plots in the United States by Muslims, and it does a disservice to a minority group that suffers from increasingly hostile public opinion,” they wrote.

The New York Times isn’t the only place to find an op-ed on terrorism that’s more afraid of American conservatives than ISIS killers, but it’s the most prominent — and one of the most dangerous.

Any wonder Barack Obama loves the rag?

Michael Schaus

Michael Schaus

Michael Schaus is a talk radio host, political humorist, and columnist. Having worked in a wide range of industries (including construction, journalism, and financial services) his perspectives and world views are forged with a deep understanding of what it means to be an American entrepreneur.
Michael Schaus

Comments

25 thoughts on “‘Right wing extremists’ more dangerous than radical Islam, according to NY Times

  1. SusieQ says:

    The New York Times is irrelevant and a socialist rag. Just another arm of the democrat/socialist party. No one buys their leftist bent anymore.

    1. hpinnc says:

      Are they owned by Pravda? I am always amazed at what left-wing nuts will come out with. If they think the extremists in this country are “right wing nuts” they are really out in left field. I am a conservative, I am not interested in taking anyone down. I am for abiding by our constitution, I am for smaller government, free enterprise, I am for the things that made our government great in the first place. I am opposed to everything the liberal/marxist/socialist/communist/democrats espouse. They are destroying the “American Dream” with all their multiculturalism, political correctness & letting into the country in droves, muslims, criminals, drug-cartels, you name it, it is coming across our borders, the “regime” doesn’t care. Then these two idiot, ignoramuses who calls themselves professors, have the gall to say the right wing nuts is what you better watch out for. I cannot express my disdain for these creeps, i do not have the vocabulary to describe what scumbags I think they are, & the NYT are just as low for printing this garbage.

      1. SusieQ says:

        Their goal is to put conservatives on the defensive. Hey, it’s worked so far with the Republicans. They despise talking of their failures or shortcomings. I’m sure you have watched the seasoned libs on TV etc deflecting any question and putting the onus on the one asking the question and the opposing party (should it not be a cuddly MSM person) about why they do what they do or how and why their policies are put into place despite the objections of the general public. Not to mention all failures.

        We are dealing with arrogant ideologues nurtured by Obama and his minions for one purpose socialism, of which they will not adhere to because the hardships are not their cup of tea. Notice the statement of Obama’s, “no one should need more than $200,000 a year to live on”. Has he given a way all his money but for that amount? No. and he won’t It’s the same ol’ malarkey, just history repeating itself. Again will never work. It never stops them though and everyone should just walk past this even worst than ever publication and just laugh at then. They are on the losing end and they will lose.

  2. Rip Rogers says:

    I am proud to be as my family was in the days of the First American Revolution, Protestant and good shots. Yes, I am a Conservative Constitutinalist to the bone. estb 1609…

    1. Rip Rogers says:

      Those coming against the Original American conservative, should indeed be afraid.

    2. Adam Steed says:

      You do know that The Conservatives were the Tories right?

  3. WeCanWinThisFight says:

    ‘NY Slimes’ — Mark Levin
    These low-lifes are always pushing the narrative to immediately be able to wrongly blame law-abiding citizens the moment anything bad happens – like the Co. movie theater shooting… “We found a James Holmes who is a Tea-Partier'”… The state-run media does it ALL_THE_TIME and must keep the LIE out in the public domain at all times to further their sick, Un-American agendas. They are lower than the lowest stinking slimy scum.

  4. Richard5877 says:

    You wonder how the hell these people received there PHD’s ???????

    1. The Infidel says:

      They got them from other liberal POS “educators”!

    2. kunling says:

      They received their PHDs through affirmative action……..How else?

    3. Liberalismsucks says:

      Earned simply by towing the liberal professors line (agenda) and spewing socialist garbage.

  5. bnaarty4 says:

    …………….i like me bizpacreview…….

    ……………….. Find Get More </b

  6. sanityisneeded says:

    Occupy Wall Street was a leftist group and funded by leftists. The man who shot Gabby Gifford and killed some of her supporters was more leftist than anything. Maybe they should look at Ayers, a friend of the President and far left, violent person, Rev Wright professing hate for America and the many socialists who advocated violence, not to mention organizers of ‘hands up don’t shoot” fame with their leaders and the list goes on. NYT has it wrong again and provokes more violence than any right wing group by spreading lies.

    1. SusieQ says:

      The only way this so called newspaper can sell their rag these days is by provocation. This is what happens when leftist liberals are allowed to run anything, complete and utter ruination on anything they touch.

      1. henryknox says:

        The NYT has disgraced themselves to the point that they now are what the National Enquirer was 25 years ago. They are the punch line for jokes.

    2. Adam Steed says:

      Yes of course all the attackers were leftists, because you guys think Conservatives are innocent even though the Justice Department disagrees with you. SO whose facts should I believe?

      1. Xmystic says:

        Believe your own research. The Justice Department doesn’t say that. That is the interpretation of these two leftist professors. Of course all information is bent into what fits their agenda. Sometimes bent pretty hard too. TEven those cases mentioned were not done by “right extremists” Most were leftist koolaid drinkers, but like I said, do your own research.

      2. Alvin Chipmunk says:

        The Justice Department doesn’t have all the answers. Goes to show that the dept. itself is hateful.

      3. Liberalismsucks says:

        You mean the Injustice Department. The one run by Obama, the far left radical traitor.

      4. henryknox says:

        To a communist the fascists are right wing. To a Liberty driven US constitutionalist fascists are left wing. It depends on your perspective. American right believes in self government, a Federalist system and protection of minority rights. The Fascists, Communist and Socialist believe in totalitarian gov’t and rule by majority. As Franklin said Democracy is 2 wolves and a sheep deciding what’s for lunch.

  7. lakefire says:

    Like every other news service, Lie about anything to get sells up, only government agencies will take this stuff as true. But we in the south can sure shoot a lot better than ISIS, rage heads spray and pray.

    1. Rip Rogers says:

      Amen.

  8. Brenda Golden says:

    And why should any one give credence to the NYT? They are a liberal rag that prints garbage so the liberal left will have something to bolster their confidence. It’s just another propaganda tool not fit to line the bottom of a birdcage. But these two supposed professors need to get their crap straight, Occupy Wall Street was a left wing org that shows how stupid the left really are.

    1. henryknox says:

      Imagine them not thinking that George Soros is a left wing financier. How in the world could anybody consider Occupy Wall Street as ‘right wing’ when it was an anti-capitalist revolutionary communist organization.

  9. Jim Davis says:

    Yes, yes we are.
    When it becomes nescessary.

Comments are closed.

Related Posts